Nebraska governor signs order narrowly defining sex as that assigned at birth

[Servus]

Pillen didn't say 'keep out all the transwomen who don't look like women.' He meant all transwomen need to be kept out of restrooms. That means you need to be able to determine whom was born a biological male to stop them gaining access. That's his aim.

Any bright ideas about how to do that? Any clever suggestions as to how it's going to be done?

That's purely a strawman argument since Pillin did not propose that in the OP article. Which should be read before commenting. Otherwise one might leap to conclusions and make stuff up.

 

[Pommer]

That's purely a strawman argument since Pillin did not propose that in the OP article. Which should be read before commenting. Otherwise one might leap to conclusions and make stuff up.

I fail to see the strawman in Brad’s post?

 

[Servus]

I fail to see the strawman in Brad’s post?

Brad's running argument is all the problems that will occur in keeping them out. But Pillin didn't propose keeping them out in the OP article. Brad is the one who came up with that idea. His argument is based on something he made up ie a strawman.

 

[Pommer]

Brad's running argument is all the problems that will occur in keeping them out. But Pillin didn't propose keeping them out in the OP article. Brad is the one who came up with that idea. His argument is based on something he made up ie a strawman.

Brad was asking how would this Executive Order would affect day-to-day operations of a woman’s restroom and how would the persons “in-charge” of a particular restroom (or other) “enforce” this legal mandate from the governor?

That’s all.

It’s all hypothetical, yes, but, there are salient points in his argument.

This is not a straw-man you’re seeing, this is asking what is the practical upshot of this EO?

 

[Pommer]

The whole “which bathroom” may “whom” use might be moot?
As of now there’s no law on the books like this one that hasn’t passed in the Nebraska Senate:

“A bill to restrict transgender student participation in high school sports and limit access to bathrooms and locker rooms was introduced by Nebraska state Sen. Kathleen Kauth this past legislative session but did not advance out of committee. She has promised to try again next session.”

 

[HARK!]

Brad was asking how would this Executive Order would affect day-to-day operations of a woman’s restroom and how would the persons “in-charge” of a particular restroom (or other) “enforce” this legal mandate from the governor?

Bathroom attendants generally don't enforce laws. I've never heard of a vigil ante bathroom attendant.

 

[Pommer]

Bathroom attendants generally don't enforce laws. I've never heard of a vigil ante bathroom attendant.

So now there’s this Executive Order from on-high that doesn’t affect anything?

 

[HARK!]

So now there’s this Executive Order from on-high that doesn’t affect anything?

Would it not affect who has access to girl's bathrooms and locker rooms in schools?

 

[Bradskii]

That's your opinion. I suspect that sufficiently identifying herself would resolve any issues; if she had done nothing wrong.

Nope. What she would be doing wrong would be being in the restroom if she was born a biological male. If she doesn't have her license or any means of proving that to the police then she'd be arrested. This is what you are telling me. This is what you want the law to be. This is how it would work.

 

[HARK!]

Nope. What she would be doing wrong would be being in the restroom if she was born a biological male. If she doesn't have her license or any means of proving that to the police then she'd be arrested. This is what you are telling me. This is what you want the law to be. This is how it would work.

If he was there illegally; he be arrested whether he identified himself or not.

 

[Bradskii]

That's purely a strawman argument since Pillin did not propose that in the OP article.

Yes he did:

“As Governor, it is my duty to protect our kids and women’s athletics, which means providing single-sex spaces for women’s sports, bathrooms, and changing rooms.”

The whole discussion has been about bathrooms. Here are some comments indicating that:

...men shouldn't be in women's restrooms or locker rooms.
Trans people need to accept compromise and either use the bathroom they were assigned at birth...
Trans "women" are still men and have no business being in a women's restroom.

Your very first post in this thread was responding to a comment about restrooms and every post since then has been about restrooms even to point of suggesting how we could determine if the person was male or female.

 

[Bradskii]

If he was there illegally; he be arrested whether he identified himself or not.

If the police are there talking to a woman then their only duty is to determine if she was born biologically male or female in this nonsensical proposal. That's it. She is not breaking the law if she was born female and she would be breaking the law if she wasn't. That. Is. It.

She doesn't have to be creating a disturbance. She doesn't have to have caused any damage. She doesn't need to have verbally or physically abused anyone. She doesn't need to be drunk. And if she has no ID that indicates her sex when born then based ony our own position she will be cuffed and arrested. And put into a female lockup where apparently the new rules won't apply. Let me just repeat that. She needs to show ID to be allowed to use the womens restroom after the police arrive, but if she's taken to the lock up she will be forced to use the women's restroom in the station.

And you think that all this is entirely reasonable...

 

[Servus]

Brad was asking how would this Executive Order would affect day-to-day operations of a woman’s restroom and how would the persons “in-charge” of a particular restroom (or other) “enforce” this legal mandate from the governor?

That’s all.

It’s all hypothetical, yes, but, there are salient points in his argument.

This is not a straw-man you’re seeing, this is asking what is the practical upshot of this EO?

No he's saying if that law is put into effect (even though it's already been in effect for decades) it would have to be enforced by way of checking every woman to make sure she's a biological woman. But that's not what the governor of Nebraska or anyone else is proposing. Because of course, that's ridiculous.

Now let's examine reality. The idea of trans ideology is that you Pommer should be allowed full access to areas designated only for women and girls, if you say that you are a woman in your head. This law is designed to prevent that from happening.

Now you're already not allowed to occupy spaces that are designated only for women and girls. If you go into a YWCA and start showering with women and girls, you'll most likely get the police called on you. And you'll most likely get in trouble.

What this law is proposing is that you Pommer don't get a free pass if you say "I'm really a woman in my head".

 

[Servus]

Yes he did:

“As Governor, it is my duty to protect our kids and women’s athletics, which means providing single-sex spaces for women’s sports, bathrooms, and changing rooms.”

The whole discussion has been about bathrooms. Here are some comments indicating that:

...men shouldn't be in women's restrooms or locker rooms.
Trans people need to accept compromise and either use the bathroom they were assigned at birth...
Trans "women" are still men and have no business being in a women's restroom.

Your very first post in this thread was responding to a comment about restrooms and every post since then has been about restrooms even to point of suggesting how we could determine if the person was male or female.

Are you Bradskii allowed to use restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms etc designated only for women and girls?

 

[rjs330]

This post bothers me because of the logical flaws; in many ways you are actually arguing against your position. What you are actually conveying is that laws don't work. In every case you are talking about extra steps people do because laws don't keep them from being robbed or raped, or whatever else. It doesn't matter that the law allegedly protects them, they still need to invest in locks, put extra gates up to prevent theft, avoid dark alleys, etc. Yet in this one instance, you are trying to argue that a law is going to be protection, despite the other laws that are already there to protect people.

This seems to be a form of the special pleading logical fallacy -- how in all these other cases you need to take extra-legal protections, in fact may even be advised to by the police, because the law doesn't stop criminals from committing crimes; but then you alternatively argue that adding one new law will somehow magically stop criminals. Sorry, the poor logic really bothered me.

Is that what you got out of it? We all know laws work. And we all know that all kinds of laws have different purposes. We have criminal laws, traffic laws, civil laws. All deemed either to prevent crime or someone one being injured. We have speeding laws to try and slow people down so they don't get hurt. And it works. We have seatbelt laws that save lives. In this case these trans laws could also save women from being assaulted or peeved upon. Your not allowed to do a lot of things. You are required to do a lot of things all for various reasons.

Laws do work. We know they do in spite of the fact that crime or breakage of the laws still occur. Some were trying say we don't need the law because people will break it. He's right. Some will assault the women anyway. But some also will not assault women who would have had there not been a law allowing them access.

 

[rjs330]

This isn't the point. Pillen says he wants to ban all transwomen from rest rooms. He didn't say 'let's have a law that we can use if someone complains.' He wants to ban them from entering. Read what the man has said.

Gee that's how ALL laws work. Either the cops see it or someone complains. And unless he's got a lot more money in his pockets somewhere he's not staying cops at restroom doors. I mean theft is a crime and you don't see a cop at every entrance to every store in the state.

Welcome to The World of The Far Right when you need to flash your drivers license when you want to pee. Except you've only kicked this nonsensical can down the yellow brick road. Because now you need to determine if someone was born a male when they tick male or female on the licence application. So you'll have to make a birth certificate compulsory documentation when getting a licence and make a law requiring all women to carry it when they want to relieve themselves. Or face anight in the lock up waiting forsomeone to check their genitals for not producing it when requested.

How Pythonesque can this possible get..?

Hey I think it's a great idea. We could all use swipe cards to set into the bathroom we want.

 

[Bradskii]

Are you Bradskii allowed to use restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms etc designated only for women and girls?

No. I wasn't born female, I don't identify as female and I have not transgendered to female. So I hang out in the same toilet with those who were born male, identify as male or have transgendered to male.

 

[Bradskii]

No he's saying if that law is put into effect (even though it's already been in effect for decades) it would have to be enforced by way of checking every woman to make sure she's a biological woman. But that's not what the governor of Nebraska or anyone else is proposing. Because of course, that's ridiculous.

I guess you missed the point I was making in that checking every woman is what is ridiculous. But failing that as far as restrooms go, the proposal is nonsensical. Completely useless. A person who looks like a woman uses the restroom and...what? She uses the cubicle. Checks her eye liner. Combs her hair. I dunno, whatever women do when they're in there. And the world keeps on turning.

Now if you said that someone with male tackle wants to shower with young girls, then I'd agree. It would be a problem that needs solving. But we've had over 400 posts and they've all been discussing restrooms. And nobody, and I mean nobody, has made any attempt to seriously think it through in any way.

 

[Bradskii]

Gee that's how ALL laws work. Either the cops see it or someone complains.

What on earth do they complain about. Someone doesn't look feminine enough? Drunk in charge of a husky voice? Being in possession of some fuzz on the upper lip? Do they dial 911? 'There's someone who used the restroom who looks like they may have a 'touche if the light catches it right.' Hell yeah. Three cars and a swat squad needed. And if she ain't got ID then slap the bracelets on and It's a night in the slammer.

 

[Servus]

I guess you missed the point I was making in that checking every woman is what is ridiculous. But failing that as far as restrooms go, the proposal is nonsensical. Completely useless. A person who looks like a woman uses the restroom and...what? She uses the cubicle. Checks her eye liner. Combs her hair. I dunno, whatever women do when they're in there. And the world keeps on turning.

Now if you said that someone with male tackle wants to shower with young girls, then I'd agree. It would be a problem that needs solving. But we've had over 400 posts and they've all been discussing restrooms. And nobody, and I mean nobody, has made any attempt to seriously think it through in any way.

This law is basically not getting a free pass to do what's already illegal just because you claim to be woman in your head. That's all. There's nothing else to it.